off course, debate and arguments opposed are allways interesting and healthy, but as long as it isn't based on some kind of childish ego fights for free, for nothing , annoying and disrespectful. IMHO.I wonder if it wouldn't be best to embrace Matriarch's point of view as a valid response to all that is being said and done on the forum right now.
Without opposing views, the whole topic could get one dimensional in a hurry. If nothing else, it makes everybody think twice about what they're doing and saying, and that has to be a good thing in the long run, even if it seems a little prickly at times.
Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Moderators: VelvetGeorge, BUG
-
Xplorer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2480
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 5:27 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 7
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
off course i'll try, as soon as i can get two marshalls together, and cabs ... ( it won't be tomorrow unfortunately ) .
-
shakti
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2053
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:06 am
- Just the numbers in order: 7
- Location: Ramnes, Norway
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
I am watching this thread intensely, but don't always have time to write. This fuzzface mod info is most interesting, and I really appreciate your efforts Xplorer. There are aspects of your recent clips I like, and some that I'm not so sure about. The amount of raspiness seems good for that era Hendrix fuzz, but nevertheless it seems to lack some gain for the wildest stuff. I know it's available, as one can hear when you turn up the fuzz at the end of the first clip. So I would love to hear how it sounds with the gain a little higher and the volume backed off. I mean, isn't the intro of Star Spangled Banner done with the guitar volume backed off a little bit? IIRC, he turns it up back full for Purple Haze, but I could be mistaken.
Of course, sheer volume plays a role too, and you're playing into a slightly lower gain amp than the Super Lead he would have been using (even if the West Coast mods took it in a higher headroom/less gain direction).
And I don't really hear BOG fuzz qualities in that fuzz tone either. The BOG fuzz, to my ears, sounds perhaps "denser" and gainier, less raspy, but very tight. You can hear it very well at the moment he turns it on during Stepping Stone (forget which night, but it's on the second disc of the Fillmore East 2CD). It's the part where he is first repeating a riff with some wah in A, then in C, then back to A where he turns on the fuzz. It sounds so explosive and thick, yet with clarity and tightness. Not your standard fuzzface tone, that's for sure. The Axis Fuzz has some of those qualities, but it's too thin and too bright. But more on that later...
Just one thing that struck my mind: with all the available footage of Hendrix in 69-70, is there not a single instance where one might be able to see his fuzz settings or closeups of his neck? Woodstock in particular has a fair amount of semi-closeups of the neck. I don't have time at the moment to trawl through it, but could it be, now that we have an idea of something to look for, that we can get some visual clues as well?
Another thing I've thought about: we have to remember that Dave is not talking about Woodstock tone, BOG tone or Berkeley tone in particular. Rather, I interpret it as him talking about all the different mods/projects/directions they were going in dureing their time working with Hendrix. 45 years on, I don't expect anyone to have an accurate memory of exactly what time the different mods came into play, whether it was something that he actually used onstage at any given time, or whether it was more of a work in progress/project. So we still have a lot of work to do sorting out the different tones. And Dave's other info opens up several different cans of worms. If we accept that this was a real work in progress, it can account for a lot of the variability of Hendrix' latter year tones.
The 6550 thing seems plausible, there is some faint possible visual evidence (Woodstock), and aurally I don't really hear EL34s for the most part in 69-70. The lack of obvious modding in the known purported Hendrix amps kind of (but not decisively) contradicts it, but there's enough evidence in favour of it that I will try it in my own amp. I have a quad on the way and will report back.
The speaker issue is even more interesting. Speakers have a huge impact on the tone and response, so if he extensively used other speakers than the (until now) conventionally accepted G12H 30W 55Hz T1281, this is an area that must be explored fully!
Dave: I must repeat my question: did you swap the T1281s that were stock in his "100" logo cabs as a routine procedure, or was it only when they came in for repair or refurbishment? It surprises me if they were blowing up a lot; sure, there was the general rough life on the road and the cabs may have been thrown around and magnets could possibly shift and cause coil rub. But you always see him with full stacks, and those speakers should be able to withstand that kind of workload. The exception is studio work, where you often see a 100W with a single cab. Also on the Dick Cavett TV show he only has a single cab IIRC.
Also, as I understand it, the two types you substituted into his cabs were the T1088 grey alnico Celestion, and a Jensen "Vibranto(?)" model, is that right? AFAIK, the T1088 is an 8 ohm model. So obviously that couldn't have been matched with the 16 ohm T1281s.
In any case, I love the fact that this sub-forum is suddenly so active. No disrespect to the EVH crowd, but IMHO Hendrix tone is equally or more elusive than any EVH tone, and there has been a lack of trustworthy behind-the-scenes info. So even if I still have a tough time accepting some of this info (notched fret, I'm looking at you), I try to keep an open mind, and hoping we can keep the egos in check and a respectful tone of discussion.
Of course, sheer volume plays a role too, and you're playing into a slightly lower gain amp than the Super Lead he would have been using (even if the West Coast mods took it in a higher headroom/less gain direction).
And I don't really hear BOG fuzz qualities in that fuzz tone either. The BOG fuzz, to my ears, sounds perhaps "denser" and gainier, less raspy, but very tight. You can hear it very well at the moment he turns it on during Stepping Stone (forget which night, but it's on the second disc of the Fillmore East 2CD). It's the part where he is first repeating a riff with some wah in A, then in C, then back to A where he turns on the fuzz. It sounds so explosive and thick, yet with clarity and tightness. Not your standard fuzzface tone, that's for sure. The Axis Fuzz has some of those qualities, but it's too thin and too bright. But more on that later...
Just one thing that struck my mind: with all the available footage of Hendrix in 69-70, is there not a single instance where one might be able to see his fuzz settings or closeups of his neck? Woodstock in particular has a fair amount of semi-closeups of the neck. I don't have time at the moment to trawl through it, but could it be, now that we have an idea of something to look for, that we can get some visual clues as well?
Another thing I've thought about: we have to remember that Dave is not talking about Woodstock tone, BOG tone or Berkeley tone in particular. Rather, I interpret it as him talking about all the different mods/projects/directions they were going in dureing their time working with Hendrix. 45 years on, I don't expect anyone to have an accurate memory of exactly what time the different mods came into play, whether it was something that he actually used onstage at any given time, or whether it was more of a work in progress/project. So we still have a lot of work to do sorting out the different tones. And Dave's other info opens up several different cans of worms. If we accept that this was a real work in progress, it can account for a lot of the variability of Hendrix' latter year tones.
The 6550 thing seems plausible, there is some faint possible visual evidence (Woodstock), and aurally I don't really hear EL34s for the most part in 69-70. The lack of obvious modding in the known purported Hendrix amps kind of (but not decisively) contradicts it, but there's enough evidence in favour of it that I will try it in my own amp. I have a quad on the way and will report back.
The speaker issue is even more interesting. Speakers have a huge impact on the tone and response, so if he extensively used other speakers than the (until now) conventionally accepted G12H 30W 55Hz T1281, this is an area that must be explored fully!
Dave: I must repeat my question: did you swap the T1281s that were stock in his "100" logo cabs as a routine procedure, or was it only when they came in for repair or refurbishment? It surprises me if they were blowing up a lot; sure, there was the general rough life on the road and the cabs may have been thrown around and magnets could possibly shift and cause coil rub. But you always see him with full stacks, and those speakers should be able to withstand that kind of workload. The exception is studio work, where you often see a 100W with a single cab. Also on the Dick Cavett TV show he only has a single cab IIRC.
Also, as I understand it, the two types you substituted into his cabs were the T1088 grey alnico Celestion, and a Jensen "Vibranto(?)" model, is that right? AFAIK, the T1088 is an 8 ohm model. So obviously that couldn't have been matched with the 16 ohm T1281s.
In any case, I love the fact that this sub-forum is suddenly so active. No disrespect to the EVH crowd, but IMHO Hendrix tone is equally or more elusive than any EVH tone, and there has been a lack of trustworthy behind-the-scenes info. So even if I still have a tough time accepting some of this info (notched fret, I'm looking at you), I try to keep an open mind, and hoping we can keep the egos in check and a respectful tone of discussion.
JTM45 RS OT, 1973 18W, JTM45/100, JTM50, JMP50 1986, JMP100 "West Coast", AC15, AC30, BF Super Reverb, Boogie Mk 1, Hiwatt CP103, DR103
-
shakti
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2053
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:06 am
- Just the numbers in order: 7
- Location: Ramnes, Norway
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Forgot to say: I have another exciting Hendrix fuzz project on its way - no, not the new Dunlop BOG pedal, not a West Coast mod fuzzface. Rather, a most exclusive and rare fuzz which he may have used more than we knew and was responsible for some of my absolute, dearest favourite Hendrix fuzz moments. And AFAIK, this is the first time anyone has attempted a recreation of this particular fuzz.
I shouldn't say much more yet as I haven't yet tried the pedal, so I hope I won't be falling on my face here... But if it is as good as I hope, I know that I won't be the only one to want one. Will post photos and info in a dedicated thread when the time comes (probably sometime next week).
I shouldn't say much more yet as I haven't yet tried the pedal, so I hope I won't be falling on my face here... But if it is as good as I hope, I know that I won't be the only one to want one. Will post photos and info in a dedicated thread when the time comes (probably sometime next week).
JTM45 RS OT, 1973 18W, JTM45/100, JTM50, JMP50 1986, JMP100 "West Coast", AC15, AC30, BF Super Reverb, Boogie Mk 1, Hiwatt CP103, DR103
-
Xplorer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2480
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 5:27 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 7
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
can't you tell more about your fuzz ... now ? 
it sounds interesting.
my thought on the bog fuzz is that it may probably be a silicon fuzz + some other mods or the west coast mod mixed.
the pedal that gives me the best result is the Dunlop blue Hendrix fuzz, bc108 Inside, unmodded. it should need more output though, like with the west coast dave weyer mod, but without the rasp aspect , or just a bit, i don't know.
and you're talking about the axis fuzz, which is also a silicon fuzz. But i can't get anything bog out of this last one. but you've found some aspects of it which made you think of the bog fuzz. one thing sure : it has tons of volume.
the Dunlop bog fuzz , don't know much about it but from the clip i heard, it sounds like big marketting stuff.
yes, i'll do some other clips someday, i need to experiment more with this one, and in different conditions.
about the 55hz g12h30 , well i've heard some 75 hz ( and i play these ) , and perhaps a few 55 hz were mixed in the cabs but the 75 hz is spot on, and bassy too. the mediums and everything iaremore hendrixy. i'm surprised that the 75 hz aren't conventionaly accepted as the reference.
it sounds interesting. my thought on the bog fuzz is that it may probably be a silicon fuzz + some other mods or the west coast mod mixed.
the pedal that gives me the best result is the Dunlop blue Hendrix fuzz, bc108 Inside, unmodded. it should need more output though, like with the west coast dave weyer mod, but without the rasp aspect , or just a bit, i don't know.
and you're talking about the axis fuzz, which is also a silicon fuzz. But i can't get anything bog out of this last one. but you've found some aspects of it which made you think of the bog fuzz. one thing sure : it has tons of volume.
the Dunlop bog fuzz , don't know much about it but from the clip i heard, it sounds like big marketting stuff.
yes, i'll do some other clips someday, i need to experiment more with this one, and in different conditions.
about the 55hz g12h30 , well i've heard some 75 hz ( and i play these ) , and perhaps a few 55 hz were mixed in the cabs but the 75 hz is spot on, and bassy too. the mediums and everything iaremore hendrixy. i'm surprised that the 75 hz aren't conventionaly accepted as the reference.
-
daveweyer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:36 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 13492
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Shakti,
Correct me if you know something I don't, but I think the "1088" speakers from Thomas were actually 8 ohm models, and I believe their part # was 86-5083-2. These were the gray models, and as I mentioned before, Thomas insisted that they would handle 60 watts, even though the Celestion historians insist they would only handle 15 watts RMS.
But, since Thomas connected them all in parallel, they would have had to handle 60 watts each in order to survive the 240 watts total power the V1143-6 amp was capable of delivering at 2 ohms load.
Once again, the suffix was supposed to denote aluminum formers. Maybe some expert historian could fill us in.
Obviously the speakers had to be connected in series-parallel to set them up for tubes.
The Jensen speaker we got from Yale Radio was the C12N. They had larger voice coils and would handle quite a bit more power, sounded great too, quite loud, also 8 ohm.
It's a little tough to match 2- 8 ohm speakers with 2- 16 ohm models, but you can get away with it in a pinch.
Regarding the speaker failures, they were just the usual casualties of road wear, and jamming the speaker cones with guitar necks and such. Rubbing cones were reasonably common.
Now as for replacing new Celestions with Thomas Organ models, it was simply an experiment on my part. Armed with what I knew to be factual information regarding the 86-5083-2, I thought I was offering a reliability upgrade for the tour amps, and would be able to see how well it worked when I repaired the cabinets again. As I've said before, Bob Hovland, who was the engineer at Vox designing the series 90 amps, and I, tested those Thomas Organ speakers at the factory to make sure they would take the power, and they did.
So I put them into several of the bottoms, not sure exactly how many.
The report I got was not about reliability however, but sound, and it was favorable.
So let the historians do what they will with this information.
The same goes for the neck notches by the way. I was totally surprised no one knew about them, but I can guarantee you they were there, and so can the man who cut them.
Sorry fellas, that's just the way it was, deny it or not.
Someday you'll find a good enough shot of the guitar to see them.
Same goes for amp mods too. I've seen a picture of Jimi equipment with West Coast Mods, so I know this is not some grand dream of mine that's come to replace reality with old age wishful thinking. I spent too many painful hours at the test bench at West Coast to have forgotten what happened.
I also know you shouldn't believe it until you see it for yourself, so keep looking, and I'll take no offense at the doubters.
Correct me if you know something I don't, but I think the "1088" speakers from Thomas were actually 8 ohm models, and I believe their part # was 86-5083-2. These were the gray models, and as I mentioned before, Thomas insisted that they would handle 60 watts, even though the Celestion historians insist they would only handle 15 watts RMS.
But, since Thomas connected them all in parallel, they would have had to handle 60 watts each in order to survive the 240 watts total power the V1143-6 amp was capable of delivering at 2 ohms load.
Once again, the suffix was supposed to denote aluminum formers. Maybe some expert historian could fill us in.
Obviously the speakers had to be connected in series-parallel to set them up for tubes.
The Jensen speaker we got from Yale Radio was the C12N. They had larger voice coils and would handle quite a bit more power, sounded great too, quite loud, also 8 ohm.
It's a little tough to match 2- 8 ohm speakers with 2- 16 ohm models, but you can get away with it in a pinch.
Regarding the speaker failures, they were just the usual casualties of road wear, and jamming the speaker cones with guitar necks and such. Rubbing cones were reasonably common.
Now as for replacing new Celestions with Thomas Organ models, it was simply an experiment on my part. Armed with what I knew to be factual information regarding the 86-5083-2, I thought I was offering a reliability upgrade for the tour amps, and would be able to see how well it worked when I repaired the cabinets again. As I've said before, Bob Hovland, who was the engineer at Vox designing the series 90 amps, and I, tested those Thomas Organ speakers at the factory to make sure they would take the power, and they did.
So I put them into several of the bottoms, not sure exactly how many.
The report I got was not about reliability however, but sound, and it was favorable.
So let the historians do what they will with this information.
The same goes for the neck notches by the way. I was totally surprised no one knew about them, but I can guarantee you they were there, and so can the man who cut them.
Sorry fellas, that's just the way it was, deny it or not.
Someday you'll find a good enough shot of the guitar to see them.
Same goes for amp mods too. I've seen a picture of Jimi equipment with West Coast Mods, so I know this is not some grand dream of mine that's come to replace reality with old age wishful thinking. I spent too many painful hours at the test bench at West Coast to have forgotten what happened.
I also know you shouldn't believe it until you see it for yourself, so keep looking, and I'll take no offense at the doubters.
-
frenchie
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:50 am
- Location: france
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Dave , are the bulldog speakers you're talking about , like those ?
http://www.voxshowroom.com/us/amp/visc_bulldog.html
like the gold ones but in grey ?
or were they like those :
http://www.shootingrubys.com/voxseries90.html
which ressemble more traditional alnico celestions ... ?
http://www.voxshowroom.com/us/amp/visc_bulldog.html
like the gold ones but in grey ?
or were they like those :
http://www.shootingrubys.com/voxseries90.html
which ressemble more traditional alnico celestions ... ?
-
Tenderfoot
- Senior Member
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 6:21 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 7
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
I would be more than satisfied if I could just get more gain out of my Mayer Axis Fuzz. If anyone could tell me the resistor value I need to take out and install the pot I would appreciate it because honestly I'm just a player.
-
daveweyer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:36 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 13492
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Frenchie,
They were essentially the gray speakers in the series 90 (which my friend Bob Hovland designed), but those had a different part number 33-5105-6.
The speakers I used could have been either number, but the series 90 put out even more power, at 280 peak.
I find it odd that Celestion historians don't think these speakers could handle that kind of power.
There may be no actual difference in the speakers between the V130 and the V1143-6 other than cosmetic designs, placement of the terminals etc. But they were alnico, and they held up. Thomas Organ Co trusted them implicitly.
The interesting thing about the series 90 was that the amp could output 140 watts RMS with less than 1% distortion. I always found that idea silly for guitar players; who wants an amp that can't distort at 140 watts output?
Vox of Thomas Organ and Sava Jacobson, the original design consultant, totally missed the boat of needing distortion in the output stage to get that awesome sought-after '59 Bassman crunch that guitar players needed. It's another intriguing chapter of which I happened to be right in the middle.
Sava even talked Leo Fender into going that route, and CBS ended up with a huge disaster, West Coast Organ and Amp Service being the go-to service center for one bunch of pissed off guitar players who bought the hype.
A story for another day.
They were essentially the gray speakers in the series 90 (which my friend Bob Hovland designed), but those had a different part number 33-5105-6.
The speakers I used could have been either number, but the series 90 put out even more power, at 280 peak.
I find it odd that Celestion historians don't think these speakers could handle that kind of power.
There may be no actual difference in the speakers between the V130 and the V1143-6 other than cosmetic designs, placement of the terminals etc. But they were alnico, and they held up. Thomas Organ Co trusted them implicitly.
The interesting thing about the series 90 was that the amp could output 140 watts RMS with less than 1% distortion. I always found that idea silly for guitar players; who wants an amp that can't distort at 140 watts output?
Vox of Thomas Organ and Sava Jacobson, the original design consultant, totally missed the boat of needing distortion in the output stage to get that awesome sought-after '59 Bassman crunch that guitar players needed. It's another intriguing chapter of which I happened to be right in the middle.
Sava even talked Leo Fender into going that route, and CBS ended up with a huge disaster, West Coast Organ and Amp Service being the go-to service center for one bunch of pissed off guitar players who bought the hype.
A story for another day.
-
swankmotee
- Senior Member
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:30 am
- Location: Nashville, Tn
- Contact:
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Ok, here's an example of what Dave is talking about when it comes to how Jimi got the tones, Volume 10, Treble 10, Middle 10,Bass off, Prescence 10 on a 100wt Marshall (73') through a 68' basket weave A cab with original G12H 30's. Fuzzface is a Dunlop green JH2 (BC108C) into a Foxroxx Aquavibe with a 69' Vox 846 wah. Volume is the whole enchilada for the interaction and amount of feedback and gain.http://youtu.be/TzNi4bycAlo
The fuzz volume is 10 and the fuzz knob is backed off approximately 9.5 because of the oscillation cut off.
The fuzz volume is 10 and the fuzz knob is backed off approximately 9.5 because of the oscillation cut off.
-
Tone seaker
- Senior Member
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:08 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 7
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
This is extremely important information. Is this from notes you took or from 45 year old memory? Is this with 6550's or EL34's Thanksdaveweyer wrote: I have been on stage where Jimi performed and observed the following settings; gain-7. treble-4, mid-6 bass-4, presence-9, fuzz-2, gain-10.
-
Tenderfoot
- Senior Member
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 6:21 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 7
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
I've always looked at Hendrix as having a "clean distortion" even at low volume. Although I know it's the sum of parts working together, Xplorer's clip leads me to believe a lot of it was in the Fuzz mods.
-
JimiJames
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3550
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 6:32 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 13492
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
-
frenchie
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1504
- Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:50 am
- Location: france
Re: Who knows wah this is ?
fuck ! that's some mighty rad bog tone
we need your settings man
and setup ?ps ; to the doubters , i'm no biased fanboy there , just a rational guy ....But to set the record straight dave told us the basic layout of the scriptures there were on the woodstock amp stickers , a decent while before tazin showed us an actual west coast organ sticker and before i increased the contrast on the zoomed picture of the back of the superlead that was on the floor at woodstock , that's a factual proof he's in the know , good enough for me to think he's telling at LEAST a part of truth (euphemism inside )... plus what he told us about the reamping trend in 69 just confirmed what i already had analyzed and deduced of bog's setup .... adding to the credibility ( at least in my book ) .... it's not like he was telling , " yeah sure bulldogs were in ALL of jimi's cabs in 69...." and 6 weeks later " oh and by the way , celestion are recreating those with my expertise ....coming in 7 months , help me retire " ....
Oh and .... yeah , i had a peavey valveking 10 years ago , my settings on this piece of shit were , bass 10 , middle 0 , highs 10 , gain 10 ( i was an angry brat who wasn't up for a trip to mud-land...well i still am i guess lol ) .... Is it so insane for the occasional sound ingeneer of an artist to take notes of the artist's settings just in case the guy is late to the gig , in order to make the balance without him ??
-
daveweyer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:36 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 13492
Re: Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp
Tone seaker,
About Jimi's settings:
If YOU got to be on stage where Jimi was playing would YOU pay special attention to his settings? I thought so.
This was important to me for other reasons at the time; I wanted to have a baseline to use when I set up the amps and effects at the shop so I could compare changes I made.
The problem with my line of thinking at the time was that as any performance progressed, Jimi changed the settings to accommodate what he was feeling, and so there was no ACTUAL Jimi setting which typified his sound.
Still I used that setting when I made a change in an amp or fuzz or wah, rather enjoying playing his guitar through it.
Looking back, it kind of makes me laugh to think I got to play his guitars and equipment as much as I wanted while it was in the shop. To think my actual human DNA is on his guitars and amps is such a trip.
So 45 years is nothing when it comes to remembering the bigger events in your life, especially if you took notes on things. Finding the notes is the hardest part. I wasn't very good at documenting things either, especially in those wild days. If I would have had any historical sense of what was going down, I would have taken pictures and taken tons of notes to save for the future Jimi acolytes.
I did save, by accident, some of the info from West Coast Organ and Amplifier Service, and there are still some circuit fragments lying around here, one of Jimi's old guitar pickups, a wah from his box, and some of Brad Plunket's projects from Vox, among other things.
I was watching a Hendrix Stockholm performance the other night and was fascinated to see him turn to his amps more than once to make changes. So I would take any amp settings as a baseline for a particular performance, with particular amps, and in a particular setting, not as some gospel of what he always did.
As I said before, amps would come in to the shop with all the knobs at 11!
About Jimi's settings:
If YOU got to be on stage where Jimi was playing would YOU pay special attention to his settings? I thought so.
This was important to me for other reasons at the time; I wanted to have a baseline to use when I set up the amps and effects at the shop so I could compare changes I made.
The problem with my line of thinking at the time was that as any performance progressed, Jimi changed the settings to accommodate what he was feeling, and so there was no ACTUAL Jimi setting which typified his sound.
Still I used that setting when I made a change in an amp or fuzz or wah, rather enjoying playing his guitar through it.
Looking back, it kind of makes me laugh to think I got to play his guitars and equipment as much as I wanted while it was in the shop. To think my actual human DNA is on his guitars and amps is such a trip.
So 45 years is nothing when it comes to remembering the bigger events in your life, especially if you took notes on things. Finding the notes is the hardest part. I wasn't very good at documenting things either, especially in those wild days. If I would have had any historical sense of what was going down, I would have taken pictures and taken tons of notes to save for the future Jimi acolytes.
I did save, by accident, some of the info from West Coast Organ and Amplifier Service, and there are still some circuit fragments lying around here, one of Jimi's old guitar pickups, a wah from his box, and some of Brad Plunket's projects from Vox, among other things.
I was watching a Hendrix Stockholm performance the other night and was fascinated to see him turn to his amps more than once to make changes. So I would take any amp settings as a baseline for a particular performance, with particular amps, and in a particular setting, not as some gospel of what he always did.
As I said before, amps would come in to the shop with all the knobs at 11!
-
Xplorer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2480
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 5:27 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 7
Re: Who knows wah this is ?
the octavia jam you did is also very cool, it makes you want to grab your guitar and play